Is Blache losing touch with reality?

^ i dont agree with that .... the way we play defense and the lack of agression should NOT hinge on our offenses production....

our offense would get the ball more if our D was more aggressive, and we could create defensive points ..... and in turn we could say screw the offense like the ravens team that won the bowl... who had an offense like ours even a little worse...

they didnt play this lack-luster cusion having soft ass bend dont break BS that we play..... and i'll be damned if we dont have the talent to be a great defense that could carry our team to a winning record...

screw blache and his philosophy, its bullshit.

A lot of people are expecting miracles from the defense because we've added big Al. I agree with the poster who is of the opinion Blache is trying the best he can to temper that feeling because Haynesworth still has to play within the confines of the defense.

Because our offense has had trouble trouble scoring points the last few years, that fact has much to do with the way we play defense. We can't gamble a lot on defense and get behind because we don't have the offense to bring us back. If/when the offense picks it up and scores more points, the defense can then play a little more aggressive.

great point, never thought of it that way

^ i dont agree with that .... the way we play defense and the lack of agression should NOT hinge on our offenses production....

our offense would get the ball more if our D was more aggressive, and we could create defensive points ..... and in turn we could say screw the offense like the ravens team that won the bowl... who had an offense like ours even a little worse...

they didnt play this lack-luster cusion having soft ass bend dont break BS that we play..... and i'll be damned if we dont have the talent to be a great defense that could carry our team to a winning record...

screw blache and his philosophy, its bullshit.I bolded that paragraph because if we went for broke on defense, we might sink or we might improve, but either way, the offense would get more chances than it currently is getting. Then you could judge them on their own merits.

I recommend patience with the defense, but with all the resources we've invested in the defense, yeah they've got to do better than they did on last Sunday.

Because our offense has had trouble trouble scoring points the last few years, that fact has much to do with the way we play defense. We can't gamble a lot on defense and get behind because we don't have the offense to bring us back. If/when the offense picks it up and scores more points, the defense can then play a little more aggressive.How would you know? When was the last time we gambled and lost? 2003?

I can't wait untilwe get rid of him. We need an up and comer defensive coordinator who will be very aggressiv. I would love for someone from the staffs of the Eagles, Giants or Steelers. We have too much talent to be a bend but don't break defense. And while I'm at it I would love for a real offensive coordinator instead of Sherman Smith who will call plays for Zorn.

A lot of people are expecting miracles from the defense because we've added big Al. I agree with the poster who is of the opinion Blache is trying the best he can to temper that feeling because Haynesworth still has to play within the confines of the defense.

Because our offense has had trouble trouble scoring points the last few years, that fact has much to do with the way we play defense. We can't gamble a lot on defense and get behind because we don't have the offense to bring us back. If/when the offense picks it up and scores more points, the defense can then play a little more aggressive.

Excellent point.

I just read and interesting article on Blache from 2005. The article questions whether he is a good fit here. His last year as DC with the Bears his defense had a total of 18 sacks for the year. It seems he's always used big DT's to primarily keep blockers off the LB's and had underachieving DE's. He has never put much stock in sacks. I'm starting to wonder if we'll ever see the kind of defense that the FO is seeking as long as he is DC. We acquire pass rushers and that doesn't appear to be what he wants going by his past and present philosophy.

I just read and interesting article on Blache from 2005. The article questions whether he is a good fit here. His last year as DC with the Bears his defense had a total of 18 sacks for the year. It seems he's always used big DT's to primarily keep blockers off the LB's and had underachieving DE's. He has never put much stock in sacks. I'm starting to wonder if we'll ever see the kind of defense that the FO is seeking as long as he is DC. We acquire pass rushers and that doesn't appear to be what he wants going by his past and present philosophy.

You are right my friend, he really hasn't had any DE to speak off. I really would have liked to see Jerry Gray or Olivadotti as DC. Maybe next year.

He's tired of all the pressure thats put on the defense due to the lack of productivity from the offense. If the offense could produce more then he might seem so edgey around the media and such.

You are right my friend, he really hasn't had any DE to speak off. I really would have liked to see Jerry Gray or Olivadotti as DC. Maybe next year.

Jerry Gray sure as hell would deserve the promotion...however at this point like another poster said it would be very tempting to grab a coach from NY, Philly, Pitt or Baltimore...let's face it all those have far better defenses.